265 réponses à ce sujet

[TobyHasEyes]

marshalleck wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...

ddv.rsa wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...

 Produce more dreadnaughts.. to make up for the ones the Asari are no longer commiting to the Council. If they are completed in time, that means that they are merely making up the numbers. Obviously we would assume the Asari ones still exist, but that is why the point I was making was that this is indicative of how a 'human-dominated' Council has less authority and loses support as an institution

As long as the dreadnoughts exist, who cares where they're committed at the start of ME? With their homeworlds under attack most races would likely recall their ships anyway. In any case, after a few backroom deals on Thessia I'm sure Shepard could still get those ships.

To address you key point: obviously a coup de'tat government will have less legitimacy than what came before. But does that outweigh the gains humanity has made? Does it make fighting the reapers appreciably harder? Mabye, but I don't think so.

 The gains humanity have made are worthless unless the Reapers can be stopped..

 I don't see how having a human-dominated Council can aid humanity in the Reaper invasion; when compared to the alternative of the 'Council saved' situation

Well of course it's easy to metagame that decision. Bioware handfeed the best outcomes to paragons, especially the Council decision from ME1. If you're only going for "best" result not caring about metagaming the system, you should take paragon choices always.

 With all due respect, if you read back a bit into the debate, you would see that I got onto this topic by stating that I didn't think metagaming favoured one set of events over another, as we can be sure that no decision from ME1 or ME2 will make victory against the Reapers impossible in ME3...

 And then it was suggested that of the two alternatives in ME3, appreciating them from a meta-gaming standpoint, then the human-dominated Council is the better option to go for. I have been discussing why I don't think that is the case

 My own canon Shepard has a Paragon approach, and yet allowed the Council to die as I don't metagame and I felt the Reaper threat outweighed the gains of keeping the Council. But I still view that as sacrifice in the name of necessity, rather than bringing about an advantageous situation

[ddv.rsa]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Yeah, because they will totally know the exact military power of the turians if there are no safeguards that prevents them from constructing how many ships they want.

The treaty was put in place because of the dreadnoughts' destructive power, and so it could be controlled.

Hackett was the one who advised the Alliance to let the Turians rearm. Why? Because he knows the Reapers are coming and doesn't care about treaties or the Turian threat. He wants more firepower to fight the Reapers and exploits Turian rearmament to achieve this goal. 

[CroGamer002]

I just wrote this about "humanity is special" in Mass Effect arguments.

[marshalleck]

TobyHasEyes wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...

ddv.rsa wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...

 Produce more dreadnaughts.. to make up for the ones the Asari are no longer commiting to the Council. If they are completed in time, that means that they are merely making up the numbers. Obviously we would assume the Asari ones still exist, but that is why the point I was making was that this is indicative of how a 'human-dominated' Council has less authority and loses support as an institution

As long as the dreadnoughts exist, who cares where they're committed at the start of ME? With their homeworlds under attack most races would likely recall their ships anyway. In any case, after a few backroom deals on Thessia I'm sure Shepard could still get those ships.

To address you key point: obviously a coup de'tat government will have less legitimacy than what came before. But does that outweigh the gains humanity has made? Does it make fighting the reapers appreciably harder? Mabye, but I don't think so.

 The gains humanity have made are worthless unless the Reapers can be stopped..

 I don't see how having a human-dominated Council can aid humanity in the Reaper invasion; when compared to the alternative of the 'Council saved' situation

Well of course it's easy to metagame that decision. Bioware handfeed the best outcomes to paragons, especially the Council decision from ME1. If you're only going for "best" result not caring about metagaming the system, you should take paragon choices always.

 With all due respect, if you read back a bit into the debate, you would see that I got onto this topic by stating that I didn't think metagaming favoured one set of events over another, as we can be sure that no decision from ME1 or ME2 will make victory against the Reapers impossible in ME3...

 And then it was suggested that of the two alternatives in ME3, appreciating them from a meta-gaming standpoint, then the human-dominated Council is the better option to go for. I have been discussing why I don't think that is the case

 My own canon Shepard has a Paragon approach, and yet allowed the Council to die as I don't metagame and I felt the Reaper threat outweighed the gains of keeping the Council. But I still view that as sacrifice in the name of necessity, rather than bringing about an advantageous situation

With all due respect, in reading the post I responded to it sounded like you were directly comparing the two possible states of the game in ME2 as a result of the Council decision from ME1.

[Undertone]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...
I don't see how having a human-dominated Council can aid humanity in the Reaper invasion; when compared to the alternative of the 'Council saved' situation

The increased militarization of humans and turians?
I'd say that's good thing.

Exactly. Creating such tension allows the turians to stop obeying the treaty of Farixen and start to mass-producing ships. Humanity has to keep doing the same in order to save it's position on the Council and reinforce Council space with the Asari pulling out. The Asari on the other hand get kicked out of their comfortable seat and are now forced to adapt, rebuild what was lost and build more in order to counter a possible human-salarian-volus alliance. And lastly the salarians are very much likely to focus on militarization as well and jump on the band-wagon since they don't want to be left behind. The volus are now provided more oppurtunity to achieve greater political position and have vest interest in protecting this oppurtunity considering how the old Council kept them in place. Whatever it is they do, money or finance they will contribute more and bring greater input since now they have something to gain from.

In the context of imminent Reaper invasion, this is what the galaxy needs. Tension, new oppurtunities and competition. With the traditional power destroyed (the old Council) this allows for new interests and oppurtunities for all the races - the old ones trying to regain their power, the new ones trying to achieve greater power then they had before.

While this results in distrust and less unification in the short term, it allows for greater innovation, militarization and general increase of the output of power each species had previously had. When the Reapers come, there will be no option not to co-operate because what happens over there, matters over here. The Reapers don't discuss, bargain or deal in politics. They destroy all - something that will quickly result in the unification of the galaxy again despite suspicisions, simply because they have no other choice.

Not only is letting the Council die, a more beneficial decision for the humans, it ultimately results in a more prepared galaxy.

Modifié par Undertone, 14 septembre 2011 - 12:57 .

[TobyHasEyes]

Undertone wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...
I don't see how having a human-dominated Council can aid humanity in the Reaper invasion; when compared to the alternative of the 'Council saved' situation

The increased militarization of humans and turians?
I'd say that's good thing.

Exactly. Creating such tension allows the turians to stop obeying the treaty of Farixen and start to mass-producing ships. Humanity has to keep doing the same in order to save it's position on the Council and reinforce Council space with the Asari pulling out. The Asari on the other hand get kicked out of their comfortable seat and are now forced to adapt, rebuild what was lost and build more in order to counter a possible human-salarian-volus alliance. And lastly the salarians are very much likely to focus on militarization as well and jump on the band-wagon since they don't want to be left behind. The volus are now provided more oppurtunity to achieve greater political position and have vest interest in protecting this oppurtunity considering how the old Council kept them in place. Whatever it is they do, money or finance they will contribute more and bring greater input since now they have something to gain from.

In the context of imminent Reaper invasion, this is what the galaxy needs. Tension, new oppurtunities and competition. With the traditional power destroyed (the old Council) this allows for new interests and oppurtunities for all the races - the old ones trying to regain their power, the new ones trying to achieve greater power then they had before.

While this results in distrust and less unification in the short term, it allows for greater innovation, militarization and general increase of the output of power each species had previously had. When the Reapers come, there will be no option not to co-operate because what happens over there, matters over here. The Reapers don't discuss, bargain or deal in politics. They destroy all - something that will quickly result in the unification of the galaxy again despite suspicisions, simply because they have no other choice.

Not only is letting the Council die, a more beneficial decision for the humans, it ultimately results in a more prepared galaxy.

 Unless of course, the Reapers take longer to arrive than you might have predicted following ME1.. and the Reapers arrive to a galaxy tearing itself apart

 That or years of tension, distrust and suspicion make all the races slow to co-operate, slow to trust and utterly unable to come together. Whilst in the face of a greater enemy it makes sense to work with anyone, that isn't how decision making often goes

[Undertone]

TobyHasEyes wrote...

Undertone wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...
I don't see how having a human-dominated Council can aid humanity in the Reaper invasion; when compared to the alternative of the 'Council saved' situation

The increased militarization of humans and turians?
I'd say that's good thing.

Exactly. Creating such tension allows the turians to stop obeying the treaty of Farixen and start to mass-producing ships. Humanity has to keep doing the same in order to save it's position on the Council and reinforce Council space with the Asari pulling out. The Asari on the other hand get kicked out of their comfortable seat and are now forced to adapt, rebuild what was lost and build more in order to counter a possible human-salarian-volus alliance. And lastly the salarians are very much likely to focus on militarization as well and jump on the band-wagon since they don't want to be left behind. The volus are now provided more oppurtunity to achieve greater political position and have vest interest in protecting this oppurtunity considering how the old Council kept them in place. Whatever it is they do, money or finance they will contribute more and bring greater input since now they have something to gain from.

In the context of imminent Reaper invasion, this is what the galaxy needs. Tension, new oppurtunities and competition. With the traditional power destroyed (the old Council) this allows for new interests and oppurtunities for all the races - the old ones trying to regain their power, the new ones trying to achieve greater power then they had before.

While this results in distrust and less unification in the short term, it allows for greater innovation, militarization and general increase of the output of power each species had previously had. When the Reapers come, there will be no option not to co-operate because what happens over there, matters over here. The Reapers don't discuss, bargain or deal in politics. They destroy all - something that will quickly result in the unification of the galaxy again despite suspicisions, simply because they have no other choice.

Not only is letting the Council die, a more beneficial decision for the humans, it ultimately results in a more prepared galaxy.

 Unless of course, the Reapers take longer to arrive than you might have predicted following ME1.. and the Reapers arrive to a galaxy tearing itself apart

 That or years of tension, distrust and suspicion make all the races slow to co-operate, slow to trust and utterly unable to come together. Whilst in the face of a greater enemy it makes sense to work with anyone, that isn't how decision making often goes

Why predict what happens after ME1 when you have ME2 and Arrival which tells you that they are coming. The tensions and competition increases each race's survival chances because they are more prepared for a conflict. Actually you have numerous cases in history where it actually makes sense for everyone to work together. And if there wasn't such case it was because interests, subterfuge and diplomacy was used. No race have any benefits of the Reapers winning, nor can gain anything out of it. The Reapers don't use diplomacy.  If the latter was correct then it would be much harder for everyone to unite indeed. But since that is not the case, then my theory stands.

If the Council is allowed to live - it's position is greater then ever. Humanity is weaker due to the losses and given the Council position given, humanity doesn't have anything to bargain for anymore. We already have a Council sit and a Spectre. Considering how much Anderson did in ME2 you can tell the position is only symbolic at best. It's still 3 to 1. And the other races are sitting comfortably in their position, still obeying their treaty and limiting each other's maximal output. The Volus and the rest of the lesser races have no reason to do anything or to excell since they will gain nothing. The status quo is kept. Yeah sure you have maybe a more united galaxy at the expense of humanity which results in more stagnation which is exactly what you don't need since the Reaper invasion is imminent.

Also the tensions aren't high enough to spark an interstellar civil war immeaditely. The Asari are preparing but considering their cautious and diplomatic nature won't go to war unless push really came to shove and definitely not without the assurance that the Turians will back them up. Humanity is making alliances with the Salarians, the Vollus and the other lesser races. The Turians on their own will not act as well. Especially considering they won versus the Krogan due to the Salarian made virus. Plus they already know that humans while currently slightly inferior in terms of military might are very flexible strategically. After all the Turians still have a fresh memory from Shanxi.

Modifié par Undertone, 14 septembre 2011 - 01:14 .

[TobyHasEyes]

 @ Undertone

 The reason, Undertone, that we are predicting what will happen following ME1 is that we are looking at the decision from the end of ME1 where you either save the Council or leave them to die, with the idea presented that it is always beneficial to let the Council die (rather than being an unfortunate sacrifice as you have to focus on Sovereign)

 The seperate topic you brought up is whether this type of tension and competition is a beneficial state of affairs. I was stating that, as related to the original topic, come the beginning of ME2 you are not judging the situation based on the idea that the Reapers are a couple of months away

 In fact, the idea that the Reapers are only a couple of months away doesn't present itself until Arrival, which for arguments sake can be presented as at the end of ME2 (because realistically, you know that was when it was intended to take place)

 If you do play Arrival DLC at the end of ME2, then every decision, every choice, is made having no idea when the Reapers will arrive. So every non-meta gaming choice has to take place with no idea when the Reapers will arrive..

 Which means that provoking war to increase military spending isn't a great idea..

Modifié par TobyHasEyes, 14 septembre 2011 - 01:21 .

[Undertone]

TobyHasEyes wrote...

 @ Undertone

 The reason, Undertone, that we are predicting what will happen following ME1 is that we are looking at the decision from the end of ME1 where you either save the Council or leave them to die, with the idea presented that it is always beneficial to let the Council die (rather than being an unfortunate sacrifice as you have to focus on Sovereign)

 The seperate topic you brought up is whether this type of tension and competition is a beneficial state of affairs. I was stating that, as related to the original topic, come the beginning of ME2 you are not judging the situation based on the idea that the Reapers are a couple of months away

 In fact, the idea that the Reapers are only a couple of months away doesn't present itself until Arrival, which for arguments sake can be presented as at the end of ME2 (because realistically, you know that was when it was intended to take place)

 If you do play Arrival DLC at the end of ME2, then every decision, every choice, is made having no idea when the Reapers will arrive. So every non-meta gaming choice has to take place with no idea when the Reapers will arrive..

 Which means that provoking war to increase military spending isn't a great idea..

The original reason why I let the Council die was because it's tactically sound option. It makes absolutely no sense to go help the Destiny Ascension without metagaming that it will also turn out right. The priority is to stop Sovereign, that's it.

Having taken that decision, I discussed what the ramifications of it post factum are and how it ultimately results in a more prepared galaxy. Yes we cannot know at this point when will the Reapers come.

But considering that the Alliance never opened fire on any of the other races, never took any aggresionist actions, haven't closed political and diplomatic channels (actually has opened them for not only the previous Council races but for the "lesser ones" as well) and last but not least still saved the galaxy and the Citadel makes a prognosis of soon to come civil war between the other races highly unlikely for the reasons I've mentioned here and for  the reasons I've mentioned in my previous posts.

Either way ME1 shows you in all kinds of way that the current status quo means stagnation and the galaxy needs a change of leadership. You don't have time to think about it when taking the choice because the priority is completely different. But that doesn't stop the fact that the galaxy is in stagnation so you need to give a change and make all you can with it.

Modifié par Undertone, 14 septembre 2011 - 01:40 .

[Someone With Mass]

TobyHasEyes wrote...

 Which means that provoking war to increase military spending isn't a great idea..

That's usually never a good idea.

[ddv.rsa]

Someone With Mass wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...

 Which means that provoking war to increase military spending isn't a great idea..

That's usually never a good idea.

Which one, provoking war or increasing military spending?

[Xeranx]

I think the story could have been written further into the future than it was. They could have written humanity to gain the strides they did in 300 years (about 13 generations) meaning that it would have taken humanity 500 years to make it to the level they did if the cache on Mars wasn't found.

Tensions between Turians and Humans existing since the FCW in 2157 could be believed and Pressly's comment about racism towards Turians being in the family for years would be justified. Well, his story about it would be justified, but not his racism.

With the time lapse Udina's fervor for wanting to get Shepard made a Spectre would have more weight. Skepticism about humanity would still play a role in granting humanity a seat on the council. The Alliances actions in the BotC would then lend itself to further considerations about humanity having a seat on the council especially if suit recordings of everything that occurs in Mass Effect is allowed to play out and Vigil is able to be examined.

Of course all this would need to have taken time and care to flesh everything out like this. If you're looking at a 4 year time-frame to get everything down and there's research to be done on every bit of science you want to include, it's probably not doable.

[The Everchosen of Chaos]

The first one:provoking war is an incredibly risky venture that often turns out to be a very bad idea, however increased military spending can been as provoking war in the first place yet without a well funded military your not going to compete very well with your rivals are you?

But yeah provoking war with your neighbours is never a good idea, since obviously it's mean to be last resort. did that answer your question? I'm responding to ddv, the guy above you: just so you know.

Modifié par The Everchosen of Chaos, 14 septembre 2011 - 04:37 .

[Xeranx]

The way the Council is saved...the dialogue doesn't mesh with the footage. Knowing that the Alliance fleet comes behind the Geth it makes sense to go in fighting. It's a surprise attack.

The dialogue presents a case that looks like there's a Geth wave sitting on the sidelines waiting for possible reinforcements for Citadel factions. Even that isn't right. Probably would have been good if the scenario existed that you lost too many Alliance ships if you didn't take care of the Geth massing prior to going to Ilos and trying to save the Council resulted in Geth reinforcements rolling in.

Meta-gaming or not, there isn't sufficient evidence to suggest that there would be a great loss of life in helping out the Council.

[Lotion Soronarr]

ddv.rsa wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Just FYI - Sheapprd doesn't really have any amazing Reaper expertise. The 5th fleet took out Sovereign, not Sheppard (altough he did help). Waht technical or tactical knowledge does he havethat makes him irrelplacable and a figure to listen to?

5th Fleet would have been destroyed had Shepard not taken Sovereign's shields offline. No one is irreplaceable, but Shepard has valuable knowledge and experience:

• Shepard knows a Reaper can be destroyed by "stunning it's mind" or boarding and destroying it's core.
• Related to the above, Shepard has been inside a Reaper and knows the layout.
• Shepard has insight into how Reapers are created.
• Shepard has insight into indoctrination.
• Shepard has extensive experience fighting husks and other common Reaper minions.
• Shepard knows that the Reapers have a special interest in humanity.
• If Shepard has the Normandy again, s/he also has EDI and all her info on the Reapers / Cerberus.
• Shepard warned the Council / Alliance about the Reaper invasion, and is now vindicated.
• Shepard's reputation and accomplishments. Given the invasion, people will at least hear him/her out.

Additional speculation:

• The Reapers have a special interest in Shepard, reasons could turn out to be important.
• Shepard was rebuilt, possibly using Reaper tech. We'll see if this is important in ME3.
• Shepard has the Prothean cipher. With the Protheans being important in ME3 this could be significant.

The above may not sound like much, but it is more to go on than most species have.

1 - useless, as Reapers know about that too. I kinda dobut tehy'll go mass possesing avatars just so we cand estroy them. As for the second part - destroying hte core isn't rocket science. Everyone knows that.
2 - unless you plan to board the reapers, useless. Shep has only seen a small part of a 37 million year od reaper. We don't even know if all reapers are the same inside. Mind oyu , no one know Shep was inside a reaper.
3 - this is the only thing of value Shep really has. Ground pounders may listed to his advice, but not admirals
4 - The only thing Shep knows about indoctrination is that it exists.
5 - that's info that could be forwarded - no reason to follow Shep
6 - irrelevant
7 - hear him out and following his lead are two different things

Just saying - what the player knows and what people in the galaxy know about Shep are two different things. I really don't see any admiral letting Shep lead the naval battle.

[Lotion Soronarr]

TobyHasEyes wrote...
 My own canon Shepard has a Paragon approach, and yet allowed the Council to die as I don't metagame and I felt the Reaper threat outweighed the gains of keeping the Council. But I still view that as sacrifice in the name of necessity, rather than bringing about an advantageous situation

If it's necessary, then it's advantageus by default...

[blackouji]

They found the martian cache in the year 2148 so it is completely possible that they advanced as quickly as they did.

[TobyHasEyes]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

TobyHasEyes wrote...
 My own canon Shepard has a Paragon approach, and yet allowed the Council to die as I don't metagame and I felt the Reaper threat outweighed the gains of keeping the Council. But I still view that as sacrifice in the name of necessity, rather than bringing about an advantageous situation

If it's necessary, then it's advantageus by default...

<_< unbelievable

  What I meant was that though I think that keeping the Council would benefit tackling the Reaper threat as a whole, it is not so valuable so as to make it a higher priority in that instant than tackling Sovereign

 If there was a way to save the Council and be sure of stopping Sovereign (without meta-gaming) I would have took it, as I believe the Council to be advantageous to the cause of fighting a Reaper invasion sans Sovereign. Others are arguing that even if that was a possibility, they would not take it. That is the debate here

 

[Lotion Soronarr]

Exactly.

Which makes it advantageous...for everyone. Killing off Sovereign is the biggest advantage possible.

Weather other people would let the Council die, because they feel they are inept - that's a whole different kettle'o fish.

[TobyHasEyes]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Exactly.

Which makes it advantageous...for everyone. Killing off Sovereign is the biggest advantage possible.

Weather other people would let the Council die, because they feel they are inept - that's a whole different kettle'o fish.

 <_< and yet that was the very kettle of fish we have been discussing, whether .. Sovereign aside ..  the Reaper effort is better off with the old Council or the human-dominated Council, and to what extent that should influence your decisions

 As I was stating that the reason I let the Council die was purely due to the risks of Sovereign, rather than evaluating that not-having-the-old-Council-around would be advantageous

Modifié par TobyHasEyes, 15 septembre 2011 - 01:49 .

[Anacronian Stryx]

Personaly i think the entire idea of Shep deciding the fate of galatic affairs proposperos.

In game.

Shepard : "Hackett hold back concentrate on Sovereign".
Hackett :"Okay".

In reality it would probably have gone more like this.

Shepard : "Hackett hold back concentrate on Sovereign".
Hackett :" Shepard you might be a spectre and a commander but i'm a F''''''' admiral i will make the decision of whom to engage or not..got that?"
Shepard : "yessir".
Hackett :"Now drop and give me twenty".

in game.
*you decide that the council should die so naturally humanity completely take their place and dominates the other races because.. the old council is dead you see*.

In reality.
*The old council dies and is replaced by the vice councils from each race until they can select new permanent councillor's*

In game.
Council :"Since you helped save the council your voice will carry weight when deciding who will become the new councillor for humanity".

In reality this is probably more likely.
Council :"We are grateful for you saving us and have decided that perhaps it is time for humanity to join us, We will send a petition to Earth and let them decide though democratic means who will represent Earth.

[Someone With Mass]

Anacronian Stryx wrote...

Personaly i think the entire idea of Shep deciding the fate of galatic affairs proposperos.

In game.

Shepard : "Hackett hold back concentrate on Sovereign".
Hackett :"Okay".

In reality it would probably have gone more like this.

Shepard : "Hackett hold back concentrate on Sovereign".
Hackett :" Shepard you might be a spectre and a commander but i'm a F''''''' admiral i will make the decision of whom to engage or not..got that?"
Shepard : "yessir".
Hackett :"Now drop and give me twenty".

in game.
*you decide that the council should die so naturally humanity completely take their place and dominates the other races because.. the old council is dead you see*.

In reality.
*The old council dies and is replaced by the vice councils from each race until they can select new permanent councillor's*

In game.
Council :"Since you helped save the council your voice will carry weight when deciding who will become the new councillor for humanity".

In reality this is probably more likely.
Council :"We are grateful for you saving us and have decided that perhaps it is time for humanity to join us, We will send a petition to Earth and let them decide though democratic means who will represent Earth.

Except for the little fact that Shepard was a Spectre at the time and could do whatever he felt like.

I do agree with the new decisions when it comes to the seats of the Council, though. That was just preposterous.

They should've just replace the dead Council members with the next ones on the lists for each race. The humans taking over the Council completely with no resistance is just as stupid.

In a realistic situation, they would've triggered a serious conflict between the humans and the three major Citadel races with their little coup.

[Anacronian Stryx]

Someone With Mass wrote...
Except for the little fact that Shepard was a Spectre at the time and could do whatever he felt like.

Except for the little fact that a Spectre don't get to give orders to a Alliance admiral no matter how delusional of his/her importance that Spectre might be.

Modifié par Anacronian Stryx, 15 septembre 2011 - 02:00 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...
Except for the little fact that Shepard was a Spectre at the time and could do whatever he felt like.

I do agree with the new decisions when it comes to the seats of the Council, though. That was just preposterous.

They should've just replace the dead Council members with the next ones on the lists for each race. The humans taking over the Council completely with no resistance is just as stupid.

In a realistic situation, they would've triggered a serious conflict between the humans and the three major Citadel races with their little coup.

:lol::lol::lol:This is hillarious.

Shep isn't a some tin-pot dictator. He can't do "what he wants". To think that he can place people in political pwoer on a whim, just because he's a Spectre?????
What the hell are you smoking?

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 15 septembre 2011 - 02:05 .